Handling of pony cars?

[Chad82]

I am going to be buying a muscle (well, pony) car for weekends/summer next year (after I turn 25 for insurance rates). I am willing to do some modernization to the suspension and of course tires. I'm not really looking to make it handle like a sports car and wouldn't be doing any autox or anything like that, just for cruising along the coast on the twisties in the olympic mountains.

I decided I am wanting a 70-74 Challenger (with a 340 or 383, probably), 69-70 Mach 1 with a 351W or a 67-69 Firebird/TA with a 400. Are any of them notoriously worse handlers than others? They all appear to be around the same weight with the the firebird just beating out the mach 1 and challenger.

Also, which do you think will appreciate the best in years to come? Right now it looks like the firebird is the most underpriced of the bunch (especially when compared to camaros) and the Challenger is the most over priced with the Mach1 sitting about right. Or maybe I am completely off on those.

[MrPbody]

The plain-Jane Firebirds are still pretty affordable. The 400 and T/A are big money these days. The GM cars (Firebird and Camaro) are definitely the better handling of all "pony" cars. 2nd gen TransAm is among the best handling production cars ever built by anyone, including a large number of "sports" cars.

The 'Cuda and Challenger are getting very rare. Mach 1 is, as well. Only the "special" versions of any of these, will see significant increase in value.

Buy what you like. Build it to do what you want it to...

Jim

[Chad82]

Thanks for the feedback. I was unaware of the 2nd gen Trans Ams being good handlers, they always looked kinda piggy to me, so I never looked into them much. I don't like most of the 2nd gen F-bodies, but the black trans ams are just plain mean looking. I think I will look into them as well. But I see a number of the Firebird with a 400 under 20k.

The Challengers (Cudas seem to be a few grand more for one in equal condition, so I probably wouldn't pursue them as much) seem to have some in my price range(looking to spend 15-25k) for generally straight, mostly rust free, non number matching, decent paint and I love the looks, but I am afraid that when I get married and am forced to sell it, I would take more of a loss. I think I am trying to convince myself out of them.

And the Mach 1 I just love the looks. If it was priced closer to the firebirds, it would be a no brainer for me. But price is a factor, so I have to balance out pros and cons.

[livewire516]

The following is an excerpt from a 1970 issue of Car Craft magazine.
Standard Ponycars have poor geometry and even worse torque control. They were meant to be cheap first, sophisticated second. It is a tribute indeed that the racing teams have made sophisticated racing cars out of what basically are inferior designs (Most full-sized sedans have vastly superior suspensions.)
Pony Cars aren't corner carvers, but their light weight helps compensate for that. Fortunatly the aftermarket and support are amazing for these cars. I great handling site for the 1967-69 GM F-body: http://www.pozziracing.com/first_gen...g%20discussion

[Tates McHoolihan]

If I were you I would get the Firebird or camaro. The Firebird is probably more of what you're after. With the after-market parts available you could make a firebird handle relatively well(compared to most muscle cars). And a Cuda would be a way better choice than the challenger.

[79transam92]

firebirds seem cheaper than they really are

[79transam92]

firebirds do handle well

['97ventureowner]

Please check the last post date in the thread and avoid posting in it if it is over 3 months old.
Closed.